Features and Interviews
29 Sep 2010, 12:00 am
Summary
The country was looking forward to an eventful series when Bob Simpson’s Australians stopped over on their way home from England in September 1964. Not many people were disappointed with what followed.
The country was looking forward to an eventful series when Bob Simpson’s Australians stopped over on their way home from England in September 1964. Not many people were disappointed with what followed.
We lost the first Test in Chennai, and came back to win the second in Mumbai. There were three reasons why we won:
A - The visitors were not that formidable a side.
B - Norman O’Neil, one of their main batsmen, fell ill after the toss, and the Australians batted with only ten men.
C - Bob Simpson, one of the best catchers ever, spilt three or four chances.
We prevailed by two wickets. A lot was said about our decision to send in two night-watchmen and hold Vijay Manjrekar and Chandu Borde back, as we went about chasing 256. The strategy paid off, with Chandu coming at no. 9 and taking us through with Indrajitsinhji, our keeper.
We underwent a tough time on our tour of Australia in 1967-68. I was nursing a hamstring injury for most of the trip, and did not play any game, save the last three Tests. We erred by electing to bat in the second Test at Melbourne. The ball was doing a bit, and we were five-down for less than thirty before we realized it. I did reasonably well, scoring 75 and 85, because I had played in England, and therefore had some exposure to seamingand- swinging conditions, unlike my teammates. We subsequently decided to field first after winning the toss, to shield our batters from the first-day conditions. In the fourth Test at Brisbane, we finished thirty-nine runs short, with M.L. Jaisimha scoring a hundred. However, we had improved as a unit, as was evident in New Zealand on the second leg of our twintour. We won 3-1.
The 1969-70 season, wherein we were to host both teams, began with Vijay Merchant, the Chairman of Selectors, declaring that he wanted to ‘experiment with youth.’ I have never been opposed to ‘youth,’ but it didn’t make sense to favour youth for youth’s sake. Several youngsters made their debuts that season. I have no doubt that most of them would have been better off playing another year or two of domestic cricket before getting the call from the national selectors. Ironically, the Chairman was reluctant to pick the best of the lot – Gundappa Viswanath. “I have never heard of him,” he said when Vishy’s name came up. I then reminded him that it was impossible for him to watch every played in the land, and hence, it would be nice if he relied on his captain’s word. Vishy was duly selected, only to score a duck in his first Test innings! But he made up with a brilliant hundred in the second.
We had a pretty good team, with the spinners at their peak. They were backed by Eknath Solkar, who was a revelation at short-leg. Bill Lawry’s touring side was beatable, as the South Africans proved immediately after our series, by annihilating them 4-0. We should have won 2-1, but lost 1-3. Some ‘experienced’ players were missed, and my poor form did not help.
All the players who were discarded in favour of ‘young blood’ in 1969-70, were recalled in the following season. But that is another story.



